In order to afford shippers additional time to find a market for
lumber while in transit, appellant railroad renders a 14-day
delayed lumber service over a route ordinarily requiring from two
to four days. In doing so, it incurs additional operational
problems and costs not present in its fast freight service and not
included in its published tariff.
Held: such delayed service constitutes the furnishing
of additional "privileges or facilities," within the meaning of §
6(7) of the Interstate Commerce Act, and must be published and
filed in appellant's tariff. Pp.
362 U. S.
327-328.
173 F.
Supp. 397 affirmed.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, along with other railroads, has for years engaged in
the "roller lumber traffic" by performing intentionally delayed
service in the transportation of lumber from the West Coast to
market. Six roads so engaged have filed tariffs covering such
services at the same rate as their fast freight, and the Interstate
Commerce Commission now has such tariffs under investigation and
consideration. Appellant, however, has refused to file a tariff
covering such service, but continues to handle roller lumber
traffic on the same tariff as its fast freight.
Page 362 U. S. 328
The United States, at the instance of the Interstate Commerce
Commission, sought and obtained a permanent injunction restraining
appellant from performing its roller lumber traffic service until
it publishes and files a tariff covering the same. The District
Court found that appellant renders a 14-day delayed lumber service
over a route ordinarily requiring from two to four days. The delay
is accomplished by the holding of cars on sidings at certain points
on its trunk lines awaiting diversion orders to move the shipment
forward over the railroad's regular service. This affords the
shipper additional time to find a market for the lumber while it is
in transit. This service, the District Court found, incurred
additional "operational problems and costs" for appellant,
including switching, siding, storage and "
per diem cost
for the use of foreign cars" not present in its fast freight
service and not included in its published tariff. We agree with the
District Court that such delayed service constitutes the furnishing
of additional "privileges or facilities" under § 6(7) of the
Interstate Commerce Act, and therefore must be published and filed
in its tariff. 49 U.S.C. § 6(1).
See Turner, Dennis & Lowry
Lumber Co. v. Chicago, M. & St.P. R. Co., 271 U.
S. 259,
271 U. S. 262
(1926).
If and when appellant publishes and files such a tariff, as
other roads have already done, the Commission can then consider the
reasonableness and justness of appellant's service in the light of
that rate, giving due regard to any unjust or unreasonable
preferences or advantages that might result to shippers or other
roads should the same not be approved.
Affirmed.